Observations focused on the problems of an underdeveloped country, Venezuela, with some serendipity about the world (orchids, techs, science, investments, politics) at large. A famous Venezuelan, Juan Pablo Perez Alfonzo, referred to oil as the devil's excrement. For countries, easy wealth appears indeed to be the sure path to failure. Venezuela might be a clear example of that.

Archive for December 20th, 2004

Citycouncilam Carlos Herrera says he was detained on his way to meet with the Attroney General. He says his house is being searched looking for documents or more likely to plant them. He was detained when he was quite close to the Attorney General’s Office. Herrera, a pro-Chavez politician, called much maligned “opposition” TV station Globovison to describe his plight.

The investigative police on the other hand, denied that he has been detained, saying that the cops were simply carrying out an order to take him to the investigative police to be interviewed.

I have heard similar arguments before. Do you remember Silvino? He was just being watched. Will Herrera become another Silvino?

After one month not even looking for Herrera, they catch him right before he talks to the Attorney General…He obviously knows too much. Take your pick: Orwell or Goebbels!

Citycouncilam Carlos Herrera says he was detained on his way to meet with the Attroney General. He says his house is being searched looking for documents or more likely to plant them. He was detained when he was quite close to the Attorney General’s Office. Herrera, a pro-Chavez politician, called much maligned “opposition” TV station Globovison to describe his plight.

The investigative police on the other hand, denied that he has been detained, saying that the cops were simply carrying out an order to take him to the investigative police to be interviewed.

I have heard similar arguments before. Do you remember Silvino? He was just being watched. Will Herrera become another Silvino?

After one month not even looking for Herrera, they catch him right before he talks to the Attorney General…He obviously knows too much. Take your pick: Orwell or Goebbels!

Citycouncilam Carlos Herrera says he was detained on his way to meet with the Attroney General. He says his house is being searched looking for documents or more likely to plant them. He was detained when he was quite close to the Attorney General’s Office. Herrera, a pro-Chavez politician, called much maligned “opposition” TV station Globovison to describe his plight.

The investigative police on the other hand, denied that he has been detained, saying that the cops were simply carrying out an order to take him to the investigative police to be interviewed.

I have heard similar arguments before. Do you remember Silvino? He was just being watched. Will Herrera become another Silvino?

After one month not even looking for Herrera, they catch him right before he talks to the Attorney General…He obviously knows too much. Take your pick: Orwell or Goebbels!

Maybe the new elected leader of the student Union at Universidad Central de Venezuela (UCV) Stalin Gonzalez should just do like in old times and skip a grade to fill in as leader of the opposition. At least based on what he says, he has a much clearer picture of what is going on that both Government and opposition figures:

On the role they will play given the new muzzle law and the upcoming Higher Education Bill:

“As students we are concerned because protests are being criminalized and the regime is consolidating itself even more. The university has to have an opinion and give it a fight. The Assembly has to open itself to a dialogue, because these laws are going to change the way we live.”

On Chavez and political confrontation:

“It was too political a fight and social aspects were left aside, which is what is important. We don’t have to get rid of Chavez because he is ugly, but because he is a failure. Here we had a power struggle and society was forgotten and that is why the rich are richer and the poor are poorer. They increased fares and nobody said anything and every day the standard of living of Venezuelans deteriorates. That is why the fight has to focus in that area.

Maybe the new elected leader of the student Union at Universidad Central de Venezuela (UCV) Stalin Gonzalez should just do like in old times and skip a grade to fill in as leader of the opposition. At least based on what he says, he has a much clearer picture of what is going on that both Government and opposition figures:

On the role they will play given the new muzzle law and the upcoming Higher Education Bill:

“As students we are concerned because protests are being criminalized and the regime is consolidating itself even more. The university has to have an opinion and give it a fight. The Assembly has to open itself to a dialogue, because these laws are going to change the way we live.”

On Chavez and political confrontation:

“It was too political a fight and social aspects were left aside, which is what is important. We don’t have to get rid of Chavez because he is ugly, but because he is a failure. Here we had a power struggle and society was forgotten and that is why the rich are richer and the poor are poorer. They increased fares and nobody said anything and every day the standard of living of Venezuelans deteriorates. That is why the fight has to focus in that area.

If there is one analyst/politician that I tend to agree with is Teodoro Petkoff of Tal Cual. He seems to have a degree of common sense and fairly good understanding of economic issues, that most Venezuelan politicians lack. I guess being an economist helps (Even though he strongly disagrees with my belief that a dollarization of the Venezuelan economy would be positive). But I did not like parts of his Editorial today on what is going on in Cojedes which I wrote about last night. Essentially Petkoff does not give much importance to Governor Yanez’ decree on “intervention” of these farms:

“The exact reach of the intervention decree issued by the Government of the State of Cojedes is not clear, but it is neither an expropriation (which supposes indemnification) nor, much less, confiscation of land (which does not contemplate it)

As far as can be understood, the idea would be that a commission, within a term of sixty days would verify, with the owners of those 25 great farms, that by their extension, in principle, could fall under the definition of large states (latifundios), all involving who owns the land, as well as what it relates to its limits and the degree of utilization of the territory”

Well, I simply disagree, too many times I have seen Chavez try something, step back from it, only to come back later in full force and win, catching the opposition off guard in their naïve belief that Chavez or Chavismo would play fair. I am in the camp that thinks this is simply a trial balloon, one of many that Chavez has flown since he became President. At the end of the sixty days, the commission will expropriate or confiscate and much like the signatures for the recall vote or the cheating in the recall vote, it will be too late to do anything about it. The opposition will scream bloddy murder and nothing will happen. Maybe something will, a lwayer will go to the Supreme Court to reverse the decree, the Court will either not accept the case or rule in a contorted way and that will be that.

What I do agree with is with other parts of the Editorial when Petkoff talks about the real implications that land reform has in modern Venezuela:

“The problem does not have the dimensions that the Chavista mythology ascribes to it, especially for foreign consumption, where they make believe that we have an agrarian situation similar to 1958, Mexico in 1910 or today’s in Brazil. The truth is that the agrarian reform (even if it was incomplete, it gave away during its fifteen years three million hectares, access to credit and even housing to 200,000 agricultural families) and the capitalist development of farmlands, adding to it the violent urban development of the country (86% of the population is urban) the agrarian problem is no longer that of when Betancourt argued for reform to prevent what he used to call the “zamorazo”. But this does not impede that there still are some 500 properties (according to the 2001 census) that can be qualified as large farm estates. And if the peasant pressure does not have the characteristics of that in the middle of the last century, the elimination of large farm estates and giving land to the peasants or small agricultural producers that do not have land, will serve to complete the modernization of the agrarian structure…

But, in general, the anti-large states position still has a connotation of social justice which can not be minimized

The truth is that up to now, in this six years of Chavista Government, there has been in agrarian matters, much less work accomplished than that done by Betancourt, Leoni and Caldera in their respective presidencies.”

If there is one analyst/politician that I tend to agree with is Teodoro Petkoff of Tal Cual. He seems to have a degree of common sense and fairly good understanding of economic issues, that most Venezuelan politicians lack. I guess being an economist helps (Even though he strongly disagrees with my belief that a dollarization of the Venezuelan economy would be positive). But I did not like parts of his Editorial today on what is going on in Cojedes which I wrote about last night. Essentially Petkoff does not give much importance to Governor Yanez’ decree on “intervention” of these farms:

“The exact reach of the intervention decree issued by the Government of the State of Cojedes is not clear, but it is neither an expropriation (which supposes indemnification) nor, much less, confiscation of land (which does not contemplate it)

As far as can be understood, the idea would be that a commission, within a term of sixty days would verify, with the owners of those 25 great farms, that by their extension, in principle, could fall under the definition of large states (latifundios), all involving who owns the land, as well as what it relates to its limits and the degree of utilization of the territory”

Well, I simply disagree, too many times I have seen Chavez try something, step back from it, only to come back later in full force and win, catching the opposition off guard in their naïve belief that Chavez or Chavismo would play fair. I am in the camp that thinks this is simply a trial balloon, one of many that Chavez has flown since he became President. At the end of the sixty days, the commission will expropriate or confiscate and much like the signatures for the recall vote or the cheating in the recall vote, it will be too late to do anything about it. The opposition will scream bloddy murder and nothing will happen. Maybe something will, a lwayer will go to the Supreme Court to reverse the decree, the Court will either not accept the case or rule in a contorted way and that will be that.

What I do agree with is with other parts of the Editorial when Petkoff talks about the real implications that land reform has in modern Venezuela:

“The problem does not have the dimensions that the Chavista mythology ascribes to it, especially for foreign consumption, where they make believe that we have an agrarian situation similar to 1958, Mexico in 1910 or today’s in Brazil. The truth is that the agrarian reform (even if it was incomplete, it gave away during its fifteen years three million hectares, access to credit and even housing to 200,000 agricultural families) and the capitalist development of farmlands, adding to it the violent urban development of the country (86% of the population is urban) the agrarian problem is no longer that of when Betancourt argued for reform to prevent what he used to call the “zamorazo”. But this does not impede that there still are some 500 properties (according to the 2001 census) that can be qualified as large farm estates. And if the peasant pressure does not have the characteristics of that in the middle of the last century, the elimination of large farm estates and giving land to the peasants or small agricultural producers that do not have land, will serve to complete the modernization of the agrarian structure…

But, in general, the anti-large states position still has a connotation of social justice which can not be minimized

The truth is that up to now, in this six years of Chavista Government, there has been in agrarian matters, much less work accomplished than that done by Betancourt, Leoni and Caldera in their respective presidencies.”